ISLAMABAD: In a strong critique of patriarchal customs and gender-based violence against women in Pakistani society, the Supreme Court on Tuesday described as a profound affront to the conscience of any civilised society the tendency of men to respond to a woman’s rejection with violence rather than acceptance.
“The sole reason he takes her life is to appease his wounded ego, as he was unable to secure her hand and marry her,” observed Justice Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar in a nine-page judgement authored by him.
The observations came as a three-member bench comprising Justice Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar, Justice Salahuddin Panhwar and Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim dismissed a criminal review petition filed by Muhammad Kamran, who had sought commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment.
Kamran, who had already served a substantial part of his sentence — 15 to 16 years on death row — was convicted of murdering Mst Memoona Shaheen after she and her family rejected his marriage proposal.
Refusing review petition of murderer, SC holds woman’s consent cannot be overridden by patriarchal customs
A condemned prisoner cannot claim, as a matter of right, that completing 14 or 15 years in custody places him in the same position as a person sentenced to life imprisonment, the SC ruled.
“Marriage is a mutual, voluntary covenant that necessitates free consent of both parties.”
However, in various patriarchal systems, men are regarded as having the exclusive right to choose, demand and assert possession over a woman, irrespective of her wishes, it noted.
A woman challenges a suitor’s perceived sense of ownership when she exercises her fundamental right to say “no”. Under a patriarchal mindset, this rejection is perceived as a blow to a man’s “honour”, often resulting in stalking, home invasions, acid attacks or femicide, the judgement observed.
The judgement also cited several prevalent customs, including ghag, to illustrate how this mindset manifests itself. Ghag, a Pashto term meaning proclamation, is an archaic customary practice in which a man unilaterally claims a woman as his bride without her or her guardians’ consent. Historically, the claim was asserted by firing gunshots outside the woman’s residence or making a public declaration.
Ghag acts as an informal seal that intimidates other prospective suitors, effectively holding a woman’s marital prospects hostage, as though she were territory claimed by a man, the judgement noted. If she or her family resists, the suitor frequently resorts to violence to enforce his claim.
As a result, a woman may remain unmarried for years, or even decades, solely because of a declaration that was never followed by a legal or religious ceremony, engagement or marriage. The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Elimination of Custom of Ghag Act, 2013, has declared it a cognisable, non-bailable and non-compoundable criminal offence.
The judgement also referred to the custom of suara, also known as Vani or Badal-i-Sulh (exchange for peace). Although it operates differently from Ghag, both practices involve decisions about a woman’s marriage being made by others, disregarding her wishes and interests.
Suara involves giving a girl or young woman from a family that has committed an offence, such as homicide, in marriage to a man from the victim’s family as compensation. The arrangement is made through a jirga and serves as a substitute for criminal proceedings or financial compensation. The practice was criminalised through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2004, and further addressed by the Prevention of Anti-Women Practices Act, 2011.
Similarly, watta-satta, meaning “give and take”, is a reciprocal marriage arrangement prevalent in Pakistan in which a brother and sister from one family marry a sister and brother from another family. Such arrangements can place a woman’s well-being and marital choice at the mercy of family interests.
The common thread uniting these customs is that, in a male-dominated society shaped by patriarchal traditions, a woman’s consent to her own marriage is considered irrelevant.
The judgement said this mindset was impossible to reconcile with Islam, which requires a woman’s free consent as a prerequisite for a valid nikah. Every adult, whether a man or a woman, is equally entitled to decide whether, when and whom to marry.
That entitlement is not a concession granted by a woman’s family, tribe or society as a whole; she possesses it in her own right, the judgement emphasised.
“There is no excuse for such behaviour, regardless of whether it is committed in the name of honour, custom, injured pride, or emotions,” it said.
In the present case, the attempt to portray a woman’s lawful rejection of a marriage proposal as “provocation” or a mitigating circumstance was wholly untenable, the judgement said, adding that no person has the right to deprive another of life simply because a marriage proposal has been rejected.
Published in Dawn, October 14th, 2026
